Conservatively Speaking

All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena will continue blessing same sex wedding ceremonies. The Reverend Ed Bacon said the only difference will be the actual signing of marriage certificates. For 16-years, All Saints has blessed same sex marriages and began conducting legal same sex marriages in June after the California Supreme Court ruled that gay couples have the right to wed. Since then, the “Pasadena Star” reports the church has presided over 43-legal same sex marriages. Tuesday’s passage of Proposition 8 banned same sex marriages in California.

omorrow is Verterans Day. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Americans have a favorable opinion of the U.S. military, and 45% regard Veterans Day as one of the nation’s most important holidays. The military’s favorability rating is up eight points from a Rasmussen Reports survey for Veterans Day a year ago. Just nine percent (9%) have an unfavorable view of the military, and 12% are undecided.

Only seven percent (7%) say Veterans Day is one of our least important holidays, with 46% rating it somewhere in between the least important and most important holidays. Fifty-five percent (55%) of Republicans say Veterans Day is one of our most important holidays, but just 40% of Democrats and unaffiliated voters agree.

Only 19% say they have served in the U.S. military, including one-third (33%) of men and six percent (6%) of women. Just 15% of Republicans, 18% of Democrats and 25% of unaffiliated voters say they have had military service.

In November 1919, President Wilson proclaimed November 11 as the first commemoration of Armistice Day. World War I hostilities ended at the 11^th hour of the 11^th day of the 11^th month of 1918 although the formal peace treaty was not signed at Versailles until June 28, 1919. Armistice Day became a legal holiday in 1938 celebrating those who served in World War I. In 1954 to recognize those who served in World War II and Korea and the name was officially changed to Veterans Day is still celebrated on November 11^th.after a brief period when it was celebrated on Monday as an accommodation to public employee unions to give them a three-day holiday.

Democratic Lt. Gov. John Garamendi on Friday asked state leaders to block Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposed $4.5 billion in spending cuts and called for additional taxes, including raising the state’s vehicle license fee.

sraeli military sources said Hamas was expected to exploit the power vacuum in Israel and the United States. On Nov. 5, Hamas fired about 40 Kassam-class missiles and mortar shells into Israel. On the same day Israel IDF forces uncovered a tunnel meant for the immediate abduction of Israel Defense Forces soldiers a distance of 250 meters from the security fence of the Gaza Strip, Although Hamas observed a cease fire until the US election it has been preparing for offensive actions for weeks.

The Gaza Strip will become a graveyard if the enemy expands its incursion,” Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said. Referring to helicopter and UAV pinpoint attacks in Gaza. Earlier, according to World Tribune, Hamas issued a statement from military commander Mohammed Deif. Deif, who has spent the last five years underground in fear of an Israeli assassination, warned of attacks on the Jewish state.

Israeli is preparing to repell a Hamas attack from the south and a Hesbollah operation from the north. U. S. President-elect Obama sent an envoy to Egypt and Syria and perhaps elsewhere promising aid and to sell Egypt aadvanced F-16 Fighter bombers.

Some say Obama’s election; his envoy within 24- hours of winning and without benefit of even a security briefing, Hamas’ glee and fear of tepid future U. S. support will likely ensure the election of a more assertive Israeli administration.

An 86-year old man lays terminally ill in a hospital his wife of 65-years at his side. Calling her close he says When I was drafted in World War II – you joined the nurse corps to be by my side. When I was wounded you were by my side until I recovered. I started four businesses. They all failed. You were by my side. Now I am dying and you are by my side. I have come to an important conclusion – you’re bad luck.

ovember 4, 2008, was the 56th consecutive quadrennial United States presidential election to select the President and the Vice President of the United States. It was the first time since 1952 that neither an incumbent president nor vice president was on the ballot.

122.7 million voted almost exactly the same as 2004 despite wild predictions about turnout. The much touted “youth vote” (18-30) simply didn’t show up reaching about 11% as it did in 2004 with 64% going to Obama. Blacks did increase their vote from 11% to 13% with 93% going to Obama. White men went to McCain while women of all ethnicities went to Obama.

Obama spent $638 million and McCain $360 million and when other candidates are added more than $1 billion was spent, and that was a record.

During one touching moment during Barack Obama’s acceptance speech, Oprah was crying; Jesse Jackson was crying; Hillary was crying . . . in fact, she’s still crying.– Leno

November 6, 2008 UPI article authored by Ariel Cohen and Lajos Szaszdi adds perspective to my previous article describing Russia’s ambitions and action in the Arctic. Only two weeks ago Russia staged the largest military exercise since the Cold War off the coast of Alaska deploying a nuclear submarine, strategic bombers and warships and conducting live fire operations. The supposition then was Russia was about to lay claim to big parts of the arctic and begin to develop its massive oil, natural gas, methane hydrate clusters and large quantities of valuable minerals deposits.

Moscow has submitted a claim to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea to an area of 460,000 square miles of the arctic – an enormous area the size of Germany, France and Italy combined

”The arctic is quickly re-emerging as a strategic area where vital U.S. interests are at stake. The geopolitical and geo-economic importance of the arctic region is rising rapidly, and its mineral wealth will likely transform the region into a booming economic frontier in the 21st century. The arctic coasts and continental shelf are estimated to hold large deposits of oil, natural gas,” says the article.

Russia is moving rapidly to assert its national interests by projecting military power into the region and by using diplomatic instruments such as the Law of the Sea Treaty. Russia made a show of planting its flag on the arctic seabed in August 2007.

“While paying lip service to international law, Russia’s ambitious actions hark back to 19th-century statecraft rather than to 21st-century law-based policy and appear to indicate that the Kremlin believes credible displays of power will settle conflicting territorial claims. By comparison, the West’s posture toward the arctic has been irresolute and inadequate. This needs to change,” the Ariel Cohen and Lajos Szaszdi work says.

In August 2007, resumed regular air patrols over the Arctic Ocean. Patrolling Russian bombers penetrated the 12-mile air defense identification zone surrounding Alaska 18 times during 2007. Since August 2007 the Russian air force has flown more than 90 missions over the Arctic, Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

The Russian navy has and is expanding its presence in the arctic for the first time since the end of the Cold War. And an official statement says. “We have a number of highly professional military units in the Leningrad, Siberian and Far Eastern military districts, which are specifically trained for combat in arctic regions.”

On July 14, 2008, the Russian navy announced it had “resumed a warship presence in the arctic.” include the area of the Spitsbergen archipelago that belongs to Norway. Russia does not recognize Norway’s right to a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone around Spitsbergen. Russia deployed an anti-submarine warfare destroyer followed by a guided-missile cruiser armed with 16 long-range anti-ship cruise missiles designed to destroy aircraft carriers.

The United States, Canada, Denmark and Norway — the leading arctic NATO members — must take Russian ambitions seriously. While a major military confrontation has a low probability today, the arctic is emerging as a new Cold War flashpoint, reminiscent of the 20th-century tensions in the region. Russia sensed an opportunity to successfully press an inexperienced new U. S. President, and get what it wants taking back what it lost in the Reagan era.

(Ariel Cohen, Ph.D., is senior research fellow in Russian and Eurasian studies and international energy security, and Lajos F. Szaszdi, Ph.D., is a researcher in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation.)

n November 4, 2008 Russia threated to deploy conventional warhead missile on the Polish border to curb Washington’s defense shield. President Dmitry Medvedev’s decision to set up Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad territory wedged between Poland and Lithuania — announced just as Obama was elected — immediately raised “serious worries” at NATO and signals Russia will test the new President. Medvedev said the move would neutralise the security threat posed by the US shield which will link 10 interceptors in Poland to a radar in the Czech Republic by 2013-2014 and is aimed at countering “rogue states” like Iran. As reported here the Czechs had delayed final approval until after the US election so Russia already has something in its favor.

The deployment might raise new tensions between Russia and NATO — whose biggest and most powerful member is the United States — it would not, of itself, significantly change the military balance of power. Without a strong U. S. commitment Europe and NATO are paper tigers.

Analysts differ over how the future US administration will respond to the move.

“If they think that the United States will give up the idea of deploying their anti-missile shield, they’re barking up the wrong tree,” said Francois Heisbourg, special advisor at the Foundation for Research and Security (FRS) in Paris.

Certainly US Democrats have never been as enthusiastic as President George W. Bush’s Republicans toward this vast and costly — roughly eight to nine billion dollars a year — expansion of the defense shield into Europe.

“Obama is extremely sensitive to anything that might portray him as someone who is easy to intimidate”, because of his lack of international experience, Heisbourg noted.

Andrew Cuchins, at Washington’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, Moscow’s “public relations” error must not be allowed to drive the wedge deeper between Russia and the United States right now. “A failed diplomacy with Russia is not workable,” he said.

“If we don’t convince the Russians we are taking these concerns into account, (there will be) no way to negotiate on armaments control and proliferation,” he said.

He also said it was vital “to convince the Iranians that Russia and the Americans are serious about cooperating.”.

Contrary to most cooperative arguments is Vice President-elect Joe Biden, notorious for his big mouth and anti-Russian views, lamented in his nomination speech acceptance speech in August a U. S.  “failing to face down Russia.” And at a major foreign policy speech in Cincinnati on Sept. 25, Biden said Russia was as much of a threat as Iran.

European leaders are generally pro-American and anti-Russian and infatuated with Obama left-liberalism, youth, dynamism, change, and ethnic diversity. They see Russia as politically reactionary and as a threat to their most cherished ideals thinks John Laughland is a British historian and political scientist and the director of studies at the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation in Paris. Who also said, “The division of the European continent between East and West, so useful for American geopolitical strategy, is likely to continue.”

Western Europe applauded Reagan’s success in collapsing the Soviet Union but almost immediately returned to a Euro-centric posture generally aschewing closer ties or commitments with Washington DC. The Bush defense shield initiative  has received tacit support but little more.

Russia’s sabre-rattling in Europe, the Middle East, Indian Ocean, South America and in the Arctic is fair warning that it will not be backing down.

Amid 230,000 job loses in October government added 23,000 employees

ednesday Obama, before even receiving his first security briefing, sent his senior adviser Robert Malley to Egypt and Syria to outline his policy on the Middle East. Reports in World Tribune say he promised continued civil and military aid to Cairo and to sell them sophisticated F-16 fighters. “The tenor of the messages was that the Obama administration would take into greater account Egyptian and Syrian interests,” the aide said, and “Obama’s message is that he strongly supports a Palestinian state.” Israel has previously expressed concern over sophisticated arms sales to Egypt. Last Fall Israel purchased nearly one hundred advanced F-16.

Simultaneously Syria has moved tanks, artillery, and commando units into battle positions on the Israeli-Lebanon border. Analysts said Obama would probably confront a Middle East crisis soon after entering office in January 2009. They said the most imminent crisis would be that of Iraq as well as the confrontation between Hamas and the PA. Both supported his election.

On Wednesday (Nov. 5), Hamas fired more than 35 Kassam-class missiles from the Gaza Strip into Israel in retaliation for an Israeli military operation the previous day. At least three people in the Israeli city of Ashkelon were injured.

Israel did not publicly comment on the Obama mission but according to the Jerusalem Post urged him not to meet with Iran as he has promised to do. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday congratulated Barak Obama on his election win - the first time an Iranian leader has offered such wishes to a US president-elect since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

Al-Qaeda is reported to be preparing to open a third front on the Horn of Africa to challenge the US efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and likely deflect efforts from its efforts to take over the Pakistani government in hope of getting access to its nuclear weapons.

On Thursday Secretary of State Rice was in the region and said there would be no peace accord now.

Protest continue around California by losers of Tuesday vote to Constitutionally ban homosexual marriage in the state. At least three lawsuits have been filed in an effort to have the courts overturn the voters for a second time.

ith the U.S. economy facing the worst outlook in three generations, it isn’t hard to figure out where the next administration will focus most of its attention and about the only thing worse would be a nuclear attack. While that possibility has been with us since the dawn of the nuclear age, it has grown worse as nuclear weapons have spread. Iran and North Korea have nukes and al-Qaida has targeted and takeover of Pakistan to grab its nuclear arsenal, and Russia is increasing its capabilities. America faces more unpredictable nuclear danger than ever before.

There were more nuclear warheads during the Cold War but, we didn’t have to worry about unpredictable characters like Kim Jong Il, the leader of North Korea, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran. Russia and China were deterred by M. .A. D. Mutual Assured Destruction the threat of overwhelming retaliation, Americans could convince themselves that they were safe. Not now says Loren B. Thompson is chief executive officer of the Lexington Institute, an Arlington, Va.-based think tank that supports democracy and the free market.

He says, “Who really understands the thought processes of Kim Il Sung’s ne’er-do-well son, or the Islamic nationalists who one day might rule Pakistan? Even if they are rational — which is assuming a lot, based on past behavior — they still might be accident prone or given to miscalculation in assessing U.S. behavior. So deterrence the way U.S. governments used to practice it is a declining franchise, at least when it comes to the growing club of nuclear arrivistes popping up around the world.”

He thinks there really is no alternative to missile defense the new administration will inherit programs capable of defeating the kind of arsenals nuclear upstarts such as North Korea possess.

Those include the missile-defense capabilities of Navy Aegis-class destroyers. They are useless against an all-out Russian strategic attack, but they can cope with most of the other threats we face today.

The problem is tomorrow, new kinds of threats, such as maneuvering warheads that will make it increasingly difficult to achieve interception once warheads have separated from rocket boosters and released penetration aids such as decoys. Plus, a potential enemy is not deterrable by MAD – because they may be. A defensive response that means hitting missiles early in their trajectory — either before boosters cut off — boost phase — or between cutoff and warhead release — ascent phase.

The U.S. Missile Defense Agency has been funding several programs that could intercept hostile missiles in boost or ascent phase including:

· Kinetic Energy Interceptor, an agile, high-acceleration system that can get close to launch sites because of its mobility;

· The Airborne Laser, which will be able to strike lofting missiles above the clouds at the speed of light using a laser from hundreds of miles away, and

· The Network Centric Airborne Defense Element, an inexpensive modification of the main air-to-air missile carried on U.S. fighters that could be ready to intercept enemy missiles by the end of the next president’s first term in office.

Other options exist. The cost of these programs is so modest, and the threat to the United States from emerging nuclear actors is so great, that the new administration needs to quickly figure out how to keep them going, regardless of what happens to the economy in the years ahead.

That could mean deeper cut in other programs since Mr. Obama has pledged severe cuts in defense. A misstep would leave the U. S. population vulnerable over the coming decade, and if wrong a million dead and dying Americans even from a rogue attack.

The Redskins lost their last home game before the Presidential election and accurately predicting a lose for the party in the White Housee.

orty percent of U.S. voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is handling his new role as president-elect. Thirty-two percent (32%) Strongly Disapprove. The majority of Americans believe relations with China are important, most do not think the economies of the two countries are very dependent on one another.

64% of Americans disagree with the notion that what is good for China’s economy is good for the U.S. economy. Just 15% think the opposite is true according to a new Rasmussen Report poll..

Some worry about the high level of Chinese investment here as the United States goes through a difficult financial period. Sixty-three percent (63%) of investors do not believe that what is good for the Chinese economy is good for America’s economy.

While adults from all parties agree that Chinese relations are important, Republicans are slightly more likely than Democrats and unaffiliated voters to disagree with the idea that what’s good for our economies is closely intertwined.

In the past, Barack Obama, now the president-elect, has referred to China as a “force to be reckoned with” and has demanded that the United States take a harsher stance on China’s currency practices and the current trade imbalance between the two powers.

Most adults (69%) consider China neither an enemy nor an ally but somewhere in between. While 15% of Republicans consider China to be an enemy, only nine percent (9%) of Democrats agree. With memories of the Cold War fading into the past, men and women under age 40 are more than twice as likely to consider China an ally than those older than 40.

As the Christmas season rapidly approaches, most adults (63%) are more concerned with the price and quality of products than where the products are produced. Twenty-eight percent (28%) put more emphasis on where products are produced.

Thirty-six percent (36%) think all toys made in China should be banned after numerous health dangers have arisen due to the county’s poor quality control standards, but 43% oppose such a ban. A plurality of women (43%) of women favor a ban on toys from China compared to 32% who oppose it. Twenty-five percent are undecided. Men by nearly two-to-one oppose a ban.

Forty-seven percent of investors (47%) oppose a ban versus 34% who favor it. Non-investors are closely divided on the issue.

Sixty-four percent of Americans disagree with the notion that what is good for China’s economy is good for the U.S. economy. Just 15% think the opposite is true. Some worry about the high level of Chinese investment here as the United States goes through a difficult financial period. Sixty-three percent (63%) of investors do not believe that what is good for the Chinese economy is good for America’s economy.

Forty percent (40%) of U.S. voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is handling his new role as president-elect. Thirty-two percent (32%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a net rating of eight on the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Approval Index.

Colorado voters reject measure to bar state affirmative action programs.

ussia’s introduction of the RS-24 Intercontinental Ballistic Missile in 2009 will be the most important phase in the renewal of the Russian Strategic Missile Force after the adoption of the Topol-M. This is the first time in post-Soviet Russia that a new ground-based multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicle — MIRV — equipped missile system will be adopted by Russia’s military.

The new missile should have a range of 6,600 miles or more, and multiple nuclear warheads are most likely to have a yield of between 150 and 300 kilotons each.

Aside from the warheads, the RS-24 carries missile defense penetration systems, hindering enemy detection and interception, which makes the new missile a valuable asset amid the deployment of U.S. global missile defense.

It can be either be silo-based or mobile version, which would increase the Russian Strategic Missile Force’s versatility. With the RS-24 entering service, the structure of the Russian Strategic Missile Forces in the coming decade looks clear. Along with the Topol-M, the new missile will form the backbone of the Strategic Missile Forces, their numbers totaling up to 250 and 60, respectively, by the end of the next decade.

Additionally, by 2020 several dozen Topol and UR-100 NUTTH intercontinental ballistic missiles will remain in service. A new heavy missile is also expected to replace the RS-20 Voevoda ICBM. All in all, the Strategic Missile Forces would include about 300 to 350 missiles of various types with 800 independently targetable warheads.

The backbone of the Russian Naval Strategic Nuclear Force will be liquid-fueled RSM-54 Sineva ICBMs installed on six 667BDRM nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, which will have their lifecycle extended into the late 2020s, and cutting-edge solid-fuel RSM-56 Bulava ICBMs on 955/955A submarines.

The Russian navy plans to commission eight missile submarines of the above-mentioned class to replace the 667BDR submarines. By 2020 the Russian navy most likely will have between 12 and 14 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines carrying between 192 and 224 missiles with 800 to 900 warheads.

Russian strategic aviation will go on with the employment of the Tupolev Tu-95MS — NATO designation Bear — and the Tupolev Tu-160 White Swan — NATO designation Blackjack — bombers, as the new advanced strategic bomber will not enter service before 2020. The balance in bomber class numbers is likely to change, however, with Tu-95 Bears down to between 40 and 48 from the current 68, and Tupolev Tu-160 Blackjacks up to between 22 and 24 from the current 16.

Therefore, before the end of the next decade, the total potential of Russia’s nuclear triad is estimated to be between 1,600 and 1,900 warheads. Is it a big figure? On the one hand, with the given deployment of U.S. missile defenses, this number of warheads doesn’t seem so. On the other hand, the rapidly increased defense penetration capability of Russian nuclear weapons will make this inventory sufficient to inflict unacceptable damage to an attacker, whoever it may be.

(This article is adapted from RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

Last 5 posts by

• January 5, 2009 - January 5th, 2009
• December 29, 2008 - December 29th, 2008
• December 22, 2008 Conservatively Speaking - December 22nd, 2008
• December 18, 2008 - December 18th, 2008
• December 8, 2008 Conservatively Speaking - December 8th, 2008